 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: clarinetfreak
Date: 1999-04-14 23:43
Why do we have to always find someone to reface our old mouthpieces? Why aren't there any Kaspar, Chevaille, type of mouthpiece makers any more? Despite the fact that we have more advanced technologies and materials, we still all look for old moouthpieces and get people to work on them. Why???
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Albert
Date: 1999-04-15 03:41
Have people ever made copies of these mouthpieces?? We have the technology, don't we? I guess it's just not the same as a real Kaspar in your mouth. :o)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katherine Pincock
Date: 1999-04-15 14:40
I think part of the reason for the refacing by a specific person is exactly that it's not mechanized--there are individual variations in each one. Yes, this does mean that there's a chance the mouthpiece won't work well for you, but it also means that your mouthpiece has a very distinct feel and often, sound. However, I can't really speak from experience here; I've always played from machined mouthpieces. Any comments from those who have custom jobs?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-04-15 16:14
Considering that a hand-faced mouthpiece is not much more than a "stock" mouthpiece in many cases, it really behooves everyone to at least try them. My Hawkins was $90; the Greg Smiths are a bit more, the Hites & Fobes a tiny bit more, the Pynes are around the Greg Smith prices, etc. For less than 10% of the price of your clarinet you can make a <b>huge</b> difference.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel
Date: 1999-04-15 18:19
I don't know why no one has made a good Kaspar copy. Fobes had his new Chedevilly copy at CLarinetFest in Ohio this past summer and it was very close to the old Chedeville's that i've played. I haven't tried any modern makers' mouthpiece that come close to any of the Kaspars i've played.
Alot of people who get Kaspars, assuming the facing is flat and undamaged, don't even bother having the mouthpiece refaced for two reasons. 1) Keeps the value up in the 600+ range (if it's a Cicero or Chicago), and 2) usually plays better than a refaced Kaspar.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: paul wusow
Date: 1999-04-15 18:20
I think, though I am not certain, that the Hawkins, Smith, and Hite are made from Zinner blanks which are copies of Kasper... I thought I read that somewhere.... Any info?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette, Webmaster
Date: 1999-04-15 19:27
The Hawkins & Smith are - However:
I know Richard and I think Greg reshape the interior somewhat - even a very slight reaming of the bore end will change the sound dramatically. The facing is only a part of the story.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Robin
Date: 1999-04-16 18:25
Daniel--
Roger Garrett (Illinois Wesleyan) makes a custom mouthpiece made to the same specifications at the old Kaspars. I use one on my Buffet and like it very much, but I have no idea how it actually compares to a "real" Kaspar. Have you tried this one?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith
Date: 1999-04-17 00:44
There are actually two Zinner "blanks" now made...
The one out for the last several years that resembles more closely the Henri Chedeville or Chicago Kaspar in it's interior dimensions and now the newer "blank" whose interior dimensions more closely resemble that of the Cicero Kaspar...especially in the baffle.
I use my own original modified version of these two generic "blanks" - continuing with further hand working each aspect of the mthpc....the chamber, bore, facing, etc, etc, to most closely resemble in playing qualities my best Kaspars and Chedevilles.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 1999-04-17 01:52
Robin wrote:
-------------------------------
Daniel--
Roger Garrett (Illinois Wesleyan) makes a custom mouthpiece made to the same specifications at the old Kaspars. I use one on my Buffet and like it very much, but I have no idea how it actually compares to a "real" Kaspar. Have you tried this one?
---
Robin,
Roger's facing measures the same but Roger doesn't claim the interior dimensions are the same.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel
Date: 1999-04-17 22:34
Roger, as i've heard, uses only a certain set of curve schedules that have been measured from existing Kaspars. But he uses blanks of various brands and makes. Just to copy a facing of a Kaspar doesn't mean much. Kaspar didn't do much with facings that haven't already been done. Plus, over the two Kaspars (Frank L. and Frank) there were hundreds of facings. So there's no way someone could make a true copy. Another thing is that no one makes the same quality of hard rubber that the Kaspars and Chedevilles are made of. But what makes the Kaspars so unique is whatever it is he did to the inside.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gregory Smith
Date: 1999-04-18 04:40
Daniel,
You are correct about the importance of the inner dimensions vis a vis the facing as to the special quality that Kaspar of Chicago and Cicero got from his mouthpieces...although there were 2 - 3 extremely successful symphonic facings that he carried through with over the years(with only slight measurement modifications to accomodate the changing french Chedeville blanks' inner dimensions)that were his claim to fame.
As to the material, there are two theorys about this:
1)The material composition of that day was indeed special and can not be duplicated today because of the high sulphur emmissions caused in the manufacturing process...the danger to workers is well documented and is forbidden in all countries except the most unregulated.
2)The material has aged, oxidized, interacted with the environment and changed from it's original form to an even more desireable mixture than ever....somehow enhancing the qualitiy of sound. Sort of like the Stradavarius theory.
Could be a product of both actually.
Then there are those makers such as Pyne that say (to paraphrase)"dimensions are everything, and the material doesn't matter...for the most part"
I personally think that there is promise in the material that comes from Zinner (and of course I would naturally be optimistic) and that there are inner and outer dimensions possible vis a vis the facing that will bring these mouthpieces to life in much the same way as the Kaspars and Lelandais and H. Chedevillles...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fan
Date: 1999-04-19 14:48
Greg:
Did you make mouthpiece with wood?
does it sound better than Zinner?
Fan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Greg
Date: 1999-04-19 17:56
Yes Fan,
I make wood mouthpieces from blanks made by Zinner although their dimensions are different than the two different rubber Zinner blanks. They are Grenadilla, Cocus, Cocobolo and some other exotic hardwoods. The wood is treated with a propritary formula that I've come up with so the wood is very stable. They take more extensive hand work than the rubber blanks and have been extremely well received by those who audition them. They are quite beautiful in appearance also. Lee Gibson, the clarinetist who reviews products for the Clarinet magazine under the column "Claranalysis" gave them quite a favorable review about 1 to 1&1/2 yrs. ago. He seemed to like them the best of all and came back to get another! They have sold remarkably well and are being played by principals of the Philharmonia Orchestra of London, Tonhalle Orchestra of Zurich, the Vancouver Symphony, the Brussels Philharmonic, to name a few. I also just played the Finzi concerto with orchestra and the Brahms trio on a chamber music concert here at the Chicago Symphony on a beautiful cocus wood mouthpiece. I think that ideally they sound better than hard rubber. It might be a wave of the future....
Gregory Smith
Clarinetist
Chicago Symphony
Mouthpiece Craftsman
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Fan
Date: 1999-04-19 18:30
What are the colors of cocus and kingwood?
do you have rosewood?
Fan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Greg
Date: 1999-04-19 18:56
cocus is a tan with beautiful marbled darker brown grain..from Jamacia
kingwood is a darker version of cocus and the grains are more pronounced and wider apart...from Brazil..a little less dense wood...
rosewood (which covers a huge catagory of different types) does not seem to be the right hardness or density for the type of mthpc. that I want to make. I've experimented alot with them.
Greg
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
